I doubt it. Players move from youth club to youth club. I thought the payouts were based on specific percentages per age group that a club had a player. If MLS is the first professional contract a player signs, I don't see that any payment is due. If a player plays for MeadManor FC from 12-16, then DC United Academy from 17 and up, I would expect that MeadManor would stand to earn Solidarity/Training based on the precentage payout in the FIFA schedule for the five years they had the player. And, of course, the real mess to come is the part where the Jamaican teams want money for players who played NCAA soccer before joining MLS teams. I'd love to see what UNC, in it's current NCAA situation, would do in the future if a check showed up as compensation for Omar Hohlness's time there. And it would be awkward to pay PDL/NPSL clubs, but not the NCAA/NAIA clubs for players playing both in the same year.
This is a pretty monumental move if MLS will be forced to compensate clubs they essentially 'steal' players from. If this is the case, MLS will be forced to they themselves finding and actually TRAINING players early on and developign them instead of picking of the top youth players of the area and then slapping an MLS club jersey on them labelling them as one of their 'products'. A lot of clubs get robbed of their top talent for nothing in return. This is great news for youth clubs out there who deserve more.
Title IX only applies to education. It reads: No person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity receiving federal financial assistance. Not really applicable to this discussion. Certainly there are discrimination laws to deal with, but the low salaries offered to women professionals wouldn't lend themselves to anything other than token payments. And solidarity payments only apply to transfers between federations which almost never happen for women. Yes, the piece about funding for teams that produce players for the WNTs is certainly applicable, though it's almost a separate discussion and it wouldn't be funded by training comp/solidarity payments (unless it's siphoned off from the guys).
Not just education. "or activity." USSF always pays attention to Title IX matters and maybe the Ted Stevens Olympic and Amateur Sports Act.
Training compensation and solidarity payments are different. * Training compensation is paid at first contract and any time a player transfers until he turns 24. The amount to be paid is supposed to be determined by CONCACAF with several generalized "levels" the desired approach. The standard top fee in CONCACAF is $40,000 per year trained from age 12 to 23. Costs between ages 12 and 15 would be reduced to the CONCACAF standard of $2,000 per year. http://www.fifa.com/mm/document/aff...tionofclubsandregistrationperiods_neutral.pdf * Solidarity payments are paid throughout a player's career whenever he transfers between federations. The money comes from the transfer payment (5%) and is paid to clubs the player was at between ages 12-23.
Nope. That can be read as any education program or education activity, That's a very generous reading of the United States Education Amendments of 1972. There's no requirement that the New England Revolution, for example, have to offer equal opportunities to girl players at the same ages.
Go ask top club teams that 'lose' a player to an MLS academy and get nothing in return and see how they phrase it.
Lose? Did the MLS team show up in an unmarked van and have a couple guys in blankets cover the player and bundle him into the van?
Like I said, go ask top clubs that end up losing a kid to a MLS academy team--ask them how they'd 'phrase it'.
If they are paying to play and then go to a place where they don't pay. Is it stealing or looking at their own best interest?
Solidarity payments, taken as a percentage of a transfer fee on a player good enough to merit one, don't worry me at all. That seems like common sense. Training compensation, on the other hand, is where the bleep could hit the fan. Imagine if every youth club suddenly marched up to every MLS, NASL, USL and ASL club with invoices. Granted, those fees are tiered according to the level of compensation ("Uh ... OK, we'll stay in D3, thanks!"), but that could still be rather frightening. It's not as if the typical NASL or USL club has tons of revenue sources that aren't already tapped like a beer keg at 3 a.m.
That's where it gets tricky.... I have some players that the club I look for are looking in to this for...and they DID NOT pay because of financial constraints....instead got a free ride because of talent.
If your program only goes to U16 (or whatever) how are you entitled to anything due to the kid moving on to another program (and/or) signing a pro contract? Seems to me it's just like a player riding out his contract and then signing elsewhere ...
Just so everyone understands what we are talking about money-wise, here are the levels for CONCACAF: CONCACAF USD 40,000 Level 2 USD 10,000 Level 3 USD 2,000 Level 4 There are no Level 1 clubs in CONCACAF. Those are per year of training at a club between ages 12-23 (ages 12-15 are paid at Level 4). Fees are paid to all training clubs, even if they are outside the US. It is considered a payment in lieu of training the player ourselves.
It's just like I've told people for years in marketing and sales situations: they come whining about how so-and-so "stole my customer". Well no, see, in order for someone to "steal" something from you, you need to "own it, and the 14th Amendment says that you're just not allowed to "own" people any more. Same thing with players. Yes, coaches do refer to some coach or club "stealing my player" but it's more metaphor than fact. Unless he has a bill of sale, it was always just a temporary agreement based on transient perception of advantage, to which permanence does not attach.
The ever-quotable Jimmy Obleda just threw some more fuel on the fire: http://www.soccerwire.com/news/full...-these-big-academy-clubs-fish-by-net/?loc=psw
“To say that, ‘Well, they’ve already been compensated,’ well no, we haven’t,” he said. “Because although they may have paid the club fees to play the season, they haven’t paid the light fees and the field fees and even the effort [from the coaches]. There has to be something for the time and effort that you put into it.”
What do the club fees go to? Your pocket? If you are a pay to play club ... I really don't feel anything for you and certainly don't feel you are owed anything on top of what you are paid by the players you train.